Vera,
It's not that no one is asking France or Germany for help.
It's also not that other African nations aren't going to
send peacekeepers. To understand the issues surrounding
the request for America to send troops to Liberia, one
needs to understand the history of Liberia and her
supposed ties to America. (I’m not a historian, but I’ll
present the followings.) The argument in the
international community is that America established
Liberia and has had longstanding ties with her. At one
point, Liberia was America's closest ally in Africa.
Liberia, for a long time, was used by the U.S. as a
staging point in that part of the world in the cold war,
covertly as well as overtly. Considering all of these,
it's only natural for countries like France and Britain to
expect the U.S. to take the lead in helping stabilize
Liberia. France did it for Cote d'Ivoire because of her
(France's) longstanding ties to that country. Great
Britain likewise did it for Sierra Leone. So, it stands
to reason that America should do the same for Liberia. I
hope you understand from the limited info presented above
why there's a call for the U.S. to take the lead.
This Liberian is one of those who would soon not have any
part of the West as long as the West does not meddle in
our business in Africa. Considering how much mess the
West has caused in Africa, the least it can do is help to
solve the problems that arise in the aftermath.
Again, I'll say that America can keep all its monies and
troops in the future as long as she helps now to clean up
the mess that she and other countries have created.
Period!
- Wilmot
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 10:14:00 -0500
Vera Crowell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Two questions (I don't mean to sound sarcastic in any
>way, I would like to
>know.) Why isn't anyone asking France or Germany to aid
>Liberia? Why
>haven't other African nations sent peacekeeping forces?
> If one of the
>answers is America's power, might, and money, I would
>then ask the
>question why would anyone seek the assistance of a
>country that has been
>(for all practical purposes) deemed a global rapist, who
>means no one any
>good (ever) and only seeks to threaten, dominate and
>victimize (after
>siphoning valuable resources that are used to further
>enrich the top 3% of
>its citizens who own 90% of the country)?
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings,
>visit:
>
> http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/aam.html
>
>AAM Website: http://www.danenet.wicip.org/aam
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, visit:
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/aam.html
AAM Website: http://www.danenet.wicip.org/aam
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|